NationStates Jolt Archive

I have a 600mhz computer with 320Mb ram running Windows 98SE. 98 isn't working too well .I have to create a new network connection every time I want to access the Internet, It crashes every time I want to shut down, won't run CHHDSK, Won't store files larger than 4GB, Won't run HD with more than 137GB storage, eats files and crashes frequently.

I was going to get a new computer until those french rioters crashed the exchange rate. So I'm stuck with this piece of junk.

Now, I've aqquired a XP cd and a COA. I was going to install the other day, but a technically minded friend of mine told me not to, on the ground that XP would gobble all my system resources like candy.

Is he right?

I liked 98 better

go with linux. microcock is evil....
*looks at his programs*
dang!

Thought about win2k? Very stable for being MS and much nicer on resources than XP...

i would sack microsoft. i have had a 95 98 and now XP and it is pretty much the worst thing ever. i have the most powerful and up to date virus protection and my system is still more infected than a cheap dimestore hood.

my next computer is a mac

my next computer is a mac
I agree. My Virus ridden computer that had 95 on it ran better than XP.

On a 600 MHz, yeah I say go with 2k. Or wait for the french army to actually put the smack down on the rioters and then buy your dream machine.

Thought about win2k? Very stable for being MS and much nicer on resources than XP...

What he said. Given your specs, XP would be unwise, imo.

Before using XP you should consider that "XP" looks like someone squinting their eyes closed and sticcking their tongue out, now do you want to develop a reputation for using rude computer systems? I thought not.

I dunno - I made the switch from Mac to Windows XP (Pro) and I feel very good about my decision. I prefer XP over OS X, anyway... it feels more like a Mac than OS X does.

And there's so much more I can do with my Windows machine that I could never do (or afford to do, really) with each and every Mac I've ever owned. Now that I've got my own custom-built machine, I can upgrade components if I need to, without having to ditch the machine entirely and buy a new one every three or four years.

I can even play a frickin' game without having to wait a year and a half for the Mac version to come out, as well as run all the apps I need to get my work done.

Yup, life has been sweet ever since I smartened up and stopped playing the game Steve Jobs' way. You say Macintosh, I say next Spring's paperweight.

IMHO Win2k is the best. I use XP at my schools library alot and its not all that good - v. flashy and v. draining. I had Millenium - which sucked ass - crashed more times then I could count. 98 was good when it was good..

I dunno - I made the switch from Mac to Windows XP (Pro) and I feel very good about my decision. I prefer XP over OS X, anyway... it feels more like a Mac than OS X does.

And there's so much more I can do with my Windows machine that I could never do (or afford to do, really) with each and every Mac I've ever owned. Now that I've got my own custom-built machine, I can upgrade components if I need to, without having to ditch the machine entirely and buy a new one every three or four years.

I can even play a frickin' game without having to wait a year and a half for the Mac version to come out, as well as run all the apps I need to get my work done.

Yup, life has been sweet ever since I smartened up and stopped playing the game Steve Jobs' way. You say Macintosh, I say next Spring's paperweight.Ain't that the truth! The only people I ever see spouting off about how great Apple is, are the same type who claim that Internet Explorer is the only browser with security flaws. :rolleyes:

I have a 600mhz computer with 320Mb ram
I installed WinXP Pro on my parents (or family) computer with the exact same build as your computer. It runs fine but Win2000 runs better. I think your computer is more than 6 years old now, I recommend you purchase a new PC with soon-to-be-released Windows Vista pre-installed. Also if you don't mind switching, I also recommend running linux in your system or switch to a mac.

It will take a chunk of your memory, but, you could do it if you wanted to. Win 98 had Dial up Networking problems that were not repairable and in some instances would remain, unless you did a low level format, which risks your hard drive everytime.
As much as I dislike microsoft, XP Pro does address this quite well enough that I have never had to reformat a single system that I maintain. (two servers and 10 workstations) If you stay away from the bells and wistles and don't run everything in 32 bit color with clear type and animated screens you can put a few more miles on that system. Of course some more memory if possible would be a great deal of help, but is not absolutely mandatory. I believe that it calls for a minimum of 256 megs of ram to install, but once installed it actually uses around 120 to 140 if you disable unecessary services and keep your task bar fairly clean. One of the systems that I maintain is a 600 MHz Dell/Hybrid so I know for a fact that it can be done.

You have the memory to handle XP, processor is a secondary concern. It may take longer to boot it up than for most people, but you should be able to run it relatively problem free.

I have a 600mhz computer with 320Mb ram running Windows 98SE. 98 isn't working too well .I have to create a new network connection every time I want to access the Internet, It crashes every time I want to shut down, won't run CHHDSK, Won't store files larger than 4GB, Won't run HD with more than 137GB storage, eats files and crashes frequently.

I was going to get a new computer until those french rioters crashed the exchange rate. So I'm stuck with this piece of junk.

Now, I've aqquired a XP cd and a COA. I was going to install the other day, but a technically minded friend of mine told me not to, on the ground that XP would gobble all my system resources like candy.

Is he right?

XP would be slowish on that PC. Windows 2000 would be more suited.
I run XP SP1 on a rather new PC which has been stable apart from my Internet Security suite being really buggy.

I'll add another vote for Win2k. I've yet to find a good reason to "upgrade" my home PC (of reasonable spec) to XP.

Just make sure you get service pack 4 - ideally before you install 2k!

I have a 600mhz computer with 320Mb ram running Windows 98SE. 98 isn't working too well .I have to create a new network connection every time I want to access the Internet, It crashes every time I want to shut down, won't run CHHDSK, Won't store files larger than 4GB, Won't run HD with more than 137GB storage, eats files and crashes frequently.

I was going to get a new computer until those french rioters crashed the exchange rate. So I'm stuck with this piece of junk.

Now, I've aqquired a XP cd and a COA. I was going to install the other day, but a technically minded friend of mine told me not to, on the ground that XP would gobble all my system resources like candy.

Is he right?

Kinda.

Yes, XP will not run uberly smoothly on your system, but it will run.
However, there are other options.

1. Why XP?

2000 might be a better idea, and probably cheaper.
Lower system requirements.

However, depending on what you do with your computer, maybe its time to upgrade?
You can either buy, or build a new system, or likely even upgrade your system pretty cheaply these days, especially if you dont need a beefed up gaming system.

If you mainly just web surf, and check your e-mail, then what you have seems fine.

However, these days, with the larger and larger sized programs on the market, you really ought to have at least a 1G processor, and a modest amount of RAM.

Oh..and before I forget...


FOR THE LOVE OF GOD...STAY THE FECK AWAY FROM WINDOWS "ME."


It serves Satan directly.

I had a Dell 800 MHz with a gob of RAM at work. I used Excel, Word, Mathcad, and Solidworks together without a problem. That was with 2K. Our intrepid IT department decided that they wanted XP on everything. They installed it and within 3 weeks, I got a new computerk because the performance sucked so much.

My recommendation is this. If you can buy a new computer when XP drags yours down, install XP. If you want to keep the 600 MHz computer running as welll as it did when it was new, stick with 98 or 2K.

Good luck.

Say, you didn't what hard drive you had.
Get at least a 7200 RPM one as running XP or 2000 on a 5400 RPM hard is frustrating.

I had a 400 MHz machine with 384Mb RAM, which before I disassembled it ran XP Pro faster than it ran 2000 Pro. It wasn't going to set any land speed records, but it worked for those tasks for which I needed it to work.

If you have the disk space and can afford to try a dual boot (one 2000 partition, one XP), I would do that until one emerges as a clear preference, then hose the less-preferred partition and reclaim the disk space.